I just want to refine my last post.

Horses would allow people and groups to greatly expand. I have seen people complain about NCR becoming to large and New Vegas being to western. The thing is NCR is expanding pretty much as far as a man can walk in a day. Well on a horse a man can travel a very long distance than if he was just on foot. NCR has trains but trains come after the NCR has moved into an area and established it.

So yeah if people want things to remain "wasteland" and "destroyed" and for factions like the NCR to not end up like being the one remaining faction.. then they should be against horses.

(numbers respond to related paragraph) (Oh and even though I might have a lot of [censorship] in this post it's not an angry post. )

1. -

2. I don't think it breaks lore to clone animals, I just don't see the logic behind it. What breaks lore to me is turning vaults into anything other than social experiments.

3. It's not unrealistic in the world of Fallout, I just don't find it feasible for the scientists to waste precious possibly irreplaceable resources on a horse, let alone enough of them to stop them from being extinct. Now a person I can understand, imagine cloning people with high IQ, a bunch of Einsteins could probably work miracles. And I'm not against the idea of traveling on one, I have nothing against horses really, it's the way you suggest them to come to that I have a problem with.

4. And I'm not opposing it, cloning happened, I have no qualms for it. Again, the problem I have is how cloning was presented as it shows that it was not a widespread thing and still in early testing and that whatever research success they had it fell to the test of time as by 2277 the vault is falling apart.

5. And like I also said, when compared to FEV and put into context; it was something that they had just started working on, which means that it was not wide-spread, just like FEV.

I don't hate horses, I don't hate the idea of riding horses, I don't hate cloning, I don't even hate the concept of cloning animals.

I'm perfectly fine with all four, the problem I have with them is that horses are almost confirmed to be extinct and using cloning or vaults to bring them back is just an excuse, not a validly written explanation, but an excuse. It's just a way to shoehorn them in without much thought. And vaults are written in lore to be social experiments. Just cause we've had some lore [censored]ups in FO3 and NV does not mean that we should just go "eh, [censored] it" and throw gasoline on the fire. That's why I called it a clown-town bananza before, if the lore is [censored] with enough it's no longer important, it's no longer worth giving a damn about as any moment the lore will be screwed over again.

See the breaking of lore part I'm talking about is vaults being social experiments, not the cloning of horses, I don't think that breaks the lore. And I don't think the concept of cloning breaks any lore. I don't mind horses nor cloning, but the lore has written those into a corner. It's not a question of whether or not a horse can be cloned, it's whether or not any other cloning facilities still exist. It's whether or not those cloning facilities are still operational. It's whether or not the resources required to clone enough horses to un-extinct them is worth it in the end.

I hope that clears something up.

Styles the NCR first started occupying the Mojave in 2270. More than a decade later it still isn't NCR territory. A few soldiers out of the entire NCR military being able to move faster simply isn't going to allow them to expand any more rapidly than they are now.

Horses would be an excellent addition to the universe.

I write how I write you can read how you like Im not here to hurt others and that should be good enough.

Whats obvious to me "again" is that cloning a horse is unrealistic in your opinion.

should I start listing all the things that are unrealistic within the FO world again? Or can we move on as what's realistic

and unrealistic in a game like FO would take forever not to mention the fact that if you take what's unrealistic out your

looking at a hole new game.

Lore was the argument.

Realism was the new argument.

Now it's preference.

I think we can agree to disagree on this one Im sick of jumping around.

Walk,run,fly..whatever at the end of the day it's a game we all love and for good reason hopefully FO4 will deliver and

thats all Im praying for it will be interesting to see what Beth comes up with horses,bikes,cars,or walking no matter.

The NCR only sent in scouts into the Mojave, at the start. It wasn't going full out take over of the area and it has had many problems since such as losing entire divisions to the Divide. If it had horse mounted troops it would be able to cover alot more land and bring in far more supplies. So far the NCR is patrolling the Mojave on foot which means the soldiers have to carry all their supplies and ammo. If they had horses they would be able to carry alot of the burden. Patrolling the Mojave wouldn't make people wish for a nuclear winter if they didn't have to walk around a desert on foot carrying military equipement, food, water, ammo and wearing leather combat armour.

Horses would improve everything. Instead of having to walk troops from California, they could ride troops in which means they could expand faster. It would also mean instead of using slow brahmin, they could get supplies in faster using horses.

It wouldn't just be the NCR, other factions like the Legion or even the Khans, hell the Khans could actually become a faction alot like the Mongolian Khans of old, but with machine guns.

It would allow factions that would have to spend weeks even months moving on foot from town to town to travel in just days.

No I'm talking about when Kimball's army showed up and started slaughtering raiders. I couldn't find anything on the timeline as to when NCR scouts first started showing up. And no it wouldn't. The existence of horses in the Fallout universe wouldn't mean horses are so numerous or well adapted to the post-apocalyptic climate that the NCR could immediately equip its entire logistics corps with fast moving chargers, which if you wanted them hauling supplies wouldn't actually be moving much more quickly than a brahmin anyway. Brahmin could remain the primary pack animal because they're better adapted to the new climate and wouldn't require nearly as much fodder and water as horses. First off regular troopers wouldn't bring horses on patrol second off even if you did how does having a pack animal wandering around with you change anything about the situation?

You're assuming for no reason that horses being in existence means the NCR can provide every soldier with a horse and is willing to train them to ride a horse. No Western nation ever had an all cavalry army Styles.



Yes and that would be amazing. It would also go a long way towards explaining why the Khans are such feared raiders. You're treating horses like an upgrade you research in a computer game that gives a 100% speed increase to all units or something. A few military units having horses is not going to change anything about any of the major factions in the Fallout universe.

Just having cavalry as part of their military would greatly improve things. Their rangers with Horses would allow them to just expand easily.

You and I will meet up in San Fransisco, I will have a horse and you will walk and we will see who makes it to Las Vegas first

If you are suggesting that Horses just show up some how as in "hey guys I discovered some horses" then yeah you would have a point that it would take a very long time for horses to have any real impact on the Fallout Universe. Horses wouldn't be bringing in supplies the same way as brahmin, they could bring in medical supplies and such. Brahmin in the first games didn't actually have stuff strapped to their bodies, they just pulled carts.

But if it is "hey horses have always been in the Fallout Universe but we didn't show them till now." Then that would be a completely different issue and if we did see horses in a future game I would bet you it would be "they have always been around."

The horses in All Road was a mistake and the devs actually went through New Vegas and removed any references to horses just so people wouldn't think horses were still around.

Yes and not only do I understand your points I also respect your opinions.

We can't really say if or how things may or may not be written in to a game we can only guess G said like you

the problem is not with horses so much as it's how thay may be written in and thats true.

writing might be a problem however money witch Beth has a lot of just might go into the writing in a major way

thats not to say money will make the writing great however great writers like money so it just might.

No it wouldn't. Again you're falling back on this concept that the speed of the NCR's expansion is dictated by how quickly their troops can reach a place. It is dictated by how fast they can secure territory which is not going to change regardless of whether or not the NCR has a few mounted infantry units. And horses don't pull carts much faster than oxen. Horses don't gallop when they're hauling stuff Styles and again there could be many obvious reasons why brahmin would remain the preferred pack animal over horses even if horses were faster.

I wouldn't have a problem with horses always being around. There simply wouldn't have been enough of them left in the Core Region to really warrant extensive (horses are mentioned in both Fallout 1 and 2) mention or use. Have the Great Khans be the first ones to really start making use of them after they stumble across wild herds in Idaho and then maybe have the NCR go to great lengths to purchase or locate some of their own after they see the newfound effectiveness of the Khans. It's not that hard to explain.

And while it's nice that that is Chris Avellone's opinion to be honest I don't really care about Chris "New Reno" Avellone's opinion on whether or not something fits in the Fallout universe. He's a talented and brilliant guy in many ways but he's never had the greatest grasp on the Fallout universe nor has he been one of it's most integral developers.

If they can move troops around from town to town to base to base in a matter of days or even hours instead of weeks or month it means they can secure towns and bases so much faster. Their troops wouldn't have to walk around carrying 80+ pounds of equipment an supplies, their horses could carry some of that burden. That is what I am talking about when I say they can move supplies. A horse plus a rider and say a hundred pounds of ammo wouldn't be any problem for a horse and they could still move very fast compared to a man carrying a hundred pounds and walking.

Picture 20 to 50 Rangers, NCR's best their elite with War Horses. Now tell me that wouldn't make a damn bit of differense. I am not saying every single NCR trooper would have a horse, but a couple hundred NCR rangers with horses would mean NCR could move and secure territory alot faster.

Without Horses:

"Sir we have a radio contact that Base Alpha is under attack! They need back up!

"Get the men we have a two day march to get to Alpha."

With Horse:

"Sir we have a radio contact that Base Alpha is under attack! They need back up!

"Get the horses ready we can be there by night fall."

World of difference.

Also it wouldn't just be Chris Avellones opinion. I am pretty sure the devs of Fallout One would have had the same debate "Should we have horse?" And I am sure other devs of Black Isle and Obsidian would have debated Chris, I doubt he was the only one who had a say on that issue. Then their is Bethesda who didn't put them in Fallout 3. I am sure it was more than just one man who made the call to not have horses. Four different companies have made Fallout games and none put horses in the game. Micro Forté being the fourth.

Edit: and no horses weren't mentioned in Fallout and Fallout 2 with any real meaning. One I believe was a crazy guy saying "my horse my horse my kingdom for a horse." Yeah that isn't clear proof of horses.

If they could move all their troops around at such a speed it would make a difference. Since the NCR would only have a few mounted units to cover literally thousands of miles of frontier the difference would be insignificant. And again you're ignoring that the NCR already has pack animals they're called brahmin Styles. You haven't come up with a single reason why having the horse would change anything about the NCR's ability to move supplies.


Sure for Base Alpha. For Bases Beta through Omega who aren't lucky enough to be one of the posts along the thousands of miles of frontier that are near a mounted unit nothing has changed. And the territory being covered by Base Alpha still requires a commitment of troops, money, time and probably even settlers that horses don't handwave away. You're not thinking about the scale here.


Sure my point is Chris Avellone's opinion that it would make the Fallout setting too Western doesn't really matter to me. And to be honest I cannot believe after playing New Vegas that horses are the bit that would tip Fallout just too much in the Western direction. There's already a lot of Western influence there and it works just fine.

In Fallout 2 Ethyl Wright also mentions tribals drinking mare's milk when mocking their practices. How would such a stereotype have developed and why would people even know about mares at that point in time? My point isn't that this is indisputable proof of horses existing in Fallout but simply that they wouldn't be that bizarre and out of place an addition.

So speed in war means nothing? Are you seriously saying that? Cause anyone who has ever commanded an army in history would tell you that you are dead freaking wrong. Also I am not talking about a horse loaded with tons of supplies I am talking about a horse with a rider and a hundred or so pounds of supplies and then you times that by say 20 horses and then you have 2000 pounds of supplies. That can prove a very real significant advantage. The rangers go in on horse with enough supplies to last a couple of days/weeks and then the brahmin with the wagons would follow up later.

Your argument is that "cavalry has never proven to be of any use to any military in history, it is completely a none issue Styles."

It would be out of place if it is "herp derp horses have been around since the start but no one has ever thought to domesticate them and we have never seen them." The devs of every Fallout game has surely thought of horses and rejected the idea. I see no reason to add them now other then people wanting Fallout to be more like TES.

You would have more than one mounted unit of rangers

I think of the technology at the moment in Fallout like it was in World War 1 plus some. NCR basically only has guns, same goes for every other faction (except a few have some more nice things). How much faster would the NCR actually be on a horse? I don't know about you guys, but a machine gun or a minigun would kill a horse rather quickly. So, a horse is only good in this game for transportation in a civil and orderly society. If horses are added to the game, I think they should die quickly. Why couldn't the Enclave easily take over everything with their helicopters (as far as i know you just need a few good shots to take one down)..

Horses would have a real hard time in the wasteland. Rough rocky ground would break their legs, radiation would make them sick and kill them and yeah stepping on a mine or getting shot would pretty much take them out of the game. A Deathclaw would be like "Awesome Horse for Dinner" and the Horse would freak and throw you and run for its life.

Actually rough and rocky ground won't break a horses legs unless the rider is extremely inept. There's a reason horses were favored in regions of the world where the terrain was fairly rough. That said, they aren't the best at it. If anything a Llama would have an easier time getting around in the wasteland, Mesoamerican societies--specifically the Moche and Inca--used Llamas to transport things up and down the Andes because they were the best of the best when it comes to being a beast of burden that can move over rougher terrain.

So actually, if people want something to ride on that could work in the rough terrain of the post-apocalyptic world then the Llama is perfect. Well, biologically, having Llamas is actually kind of stupid unless the game was Fallout: Peru.\

EDIT: It was mentioned earlier that wild horses are an endangered species, this is only partially true. The true wild horses, Equis Ferus, have three subspecies:

The Domestic Horse: Equis Ferus Caballus, which is anything but endangered.

The Tarpan: Equis Ferus Ferus, which went extinct due to a combination of domestication and interbreeding with domesticated animals

Przewalski's Horse: Equis Ferus Przewalski, which is endangered in part of China and Monglia. It is not a native horse.

The wild horses Americans think of such as Mustangs are actually the result of domestic horses going feral. Now, it should be noted that while very few Mustangs exist in the American wild this is mostly because they are feral horses. You can only have so many feral horses due to feral animals being domesticated animals that have reverted.

Oh and one last thing to keep in mind, horses are herd animals. They will group up.

EDIT 2: Okay, one last one last thing; horses have a strong sense of flight or fight but experienced riders will be able to calm the horse and keep it from getting out of control in the face of danger. If the NCR were to have mounted Rangers then I would assume that they would be able to be experienced enough to keep their cool when a Deathclaw is approaching. Just like the example with terrain, 90% of it comes down to the rider.

Well yeah a horse can go through rough rocky ground but not at a run, it would be slow and methodical. If it wasn' for the horse saving you from having to walk and carry all the gear, you would be better getting off and walking with your own two legs. Have you ever watched http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mantracker? If not watch a couple of episodes and you will see the very real limitations of a horse, as I said in an earlier post, they aren't ATVs lol.

People in the game would want their horse to be able to run no matter the terrain and that would just be stupid IMO.

1 -

2. No, you're wrong, that's 'not' my opinion.

3. For crying out loud. I never said that it's unrealistic in the universe of Fallout for cloning to be possible. I said that cloning is an experiment which started late, like FEV, and never reached it's final phase, which means that wide-spread research and cloning production is not feasible. I never said that cloning itself was unrealistic.

4. Lore was the argument against a farmville experiment in a vault and wide-spread cloning facilities. Realism was never what I used as an argument, merely context, comparison, logic, consistency and lore. And it's not preference I already told you that it's not preference. I have nothing against cloning being in Fallout and I wouldn't mind galloping around on a zebra for that matter but it's not about my preference, it's about what is consistent with the lore that we have and cloning cannot be wide-spread and vaults should not be turned into arks just so that horses can be saved.

5. -

6. -

True, and to be honest that's one thing that strikes me as absolutely nuts in TES. My horse can hover up a mountain. To be honest, if horses were to exist in Fallout then I would only want very limited uses for them. Like say, the Legion using them--or borros--to ferry supplies up and down the various canyons/mesas that exist in their territory. Calvalry would have no place in the post-apocalyptic world because warfare has no rules at this point. Plus, machine guns killed the Calvalry in World War I; and those were nothing like the guns we have in Fallout.

Yes that is definitely what I am saying. This is your argument against horses that I have been attempting to address: "Horses would allow people and groups to greatly expand. I have seen people complain about NCR becoming to large and New Vegas being to western. The thing is NCR is expanding pretty much as far as a man can walk in a day."

This is completely incorrect. The NCR is not expanding based on how fast its troops can move it is expanding based on how quickly it can secure territory. A few of its units having access to horses would have an insignificant impact on how quickly the NCR can secure territory. In fact the point you're inadvertently making here is how much more useful the few NCR cavalry units would be for fighting wars with enemies like the Legion or Brotherhood. They would not be nearly as useful securing territory along the frontier because ultimately troop mobility is not the most major element in securing and often settling land.

If the NCR was advancing by fighting wars with civilized nation states who they sought to politically annex by inflicting a decisive military defeat you might have a slight point. However as we all know they're not doing that. Stop trying to ineptly strawman my argument and address the actual issue. I've never said that cavalry would not be useful in a war in the Fallout universe I've asked you to explain why on earth having horses would have any significant impact on the NCR's expansion one way or the other.

You still haven't explained how horses bring the NCR this great supply advantage. Here's a hint when you put an average sized man and a hundred pounds of supplies together on a horse, particularly a horse that isn't specifically bred to carry those kinds of amounts, the horse isn't galloping places. The horse would not be able to move and/or drag carts full of supplies at any significantly greater pace or effectiveness than the brahmin the NCR already has. If we apply even the slightest logic to the situation we could even simply say that horses aren't nearly as effective pack animals because the fodder and water they require is far greater than the brahmin which makes them far less efficient for supply purposes and limited to a few elite units with specific functions.


If there weren't any around in significant numbers in the areas of the Fallout universe we've been to why would it be "herp derp" for us to not have seen them or for people to not make such extensive use of them that we would hear about it?

The very fact that you're now falling back on the idea that the only reason anyone wants horses in Fallout is so it would be more like TES is an embarrassment. I wouldn't even want the player to ride horses. But horses fit into the Fallout universe fairly seamlessly, would provide an interesting aesthetic and would help flesh out cultures currently in dire need of fleshing out like the Khans.


Yes you would. You would not however have sufficient horses and trained riders to cover the literally thousands of miles of frontier territory in sufficient force that you would need to make anything you're claiming make sense. Again you don't seem to grasp the scale being discussed here or why singular incidents like this example would change nothing of any significance about the NCR's expansion.

Well considering the apparent lack of anything green in the wastes, I mean anywhere in the wastes.. The horses wouldn't have survived at all.

From what I'm reading the average horse weighs about 1000-1500 lbs, but generally larger horses cannot carry more than their own weight (which I find ridiculous because of what I've seen at fairs). Anyway, a thousand pound horse can carry around 300-350 lbs without any burden. So I'd say they'd be able to carry an NCR Ranger and their gear at a reasonable pace.

As for speed not having an impact on war or battles.. Um.. What?
-First of all even if the horse carried the troops at a pace equal to what they can walk themselves, they're going to get farther, faster and without the fatigue of lugging around their weapons and gear. This significantly improves both morale of troops and energy for battle.
-A typical horse can carry their rider and their gear without much effort and can do so at a pace much faster than a typical soldier can move. They'd be able to get into placement faster. They'd be able to scout the terrain, establish a base and get a command structure in working order before the main troops even arrive. This would have a HUGE impact on how quickly an area is secured and settled.
-A small platoon of elite soldiers that can move freely between bases or to the front lines at a pace much faster than they normally could walking would have a significant impact on both defense of bases, couriering of information, and assault on front lines.

The speed at which a squad or platoon can move is highly advantageous in combat. I can't believe anyone would be of the opinion that troops moving at 10-20 mph would be equal to troops that can only move at 3 mph.

But then, none of the above even matters! One doesn't even need to consider how much faster the pace at which a faction could secure and settle an area by horse, because they simply wouldn't have survived.

A horse of about a thousand pounds (which is easily average) needs to drink 7-10 gallons of water and eat 25 lbs of grass per day, additionally they a decent amount of grain as well. I doubt that anywhere in the United States, based off of what we've seen, could supply this for a single horse. Let alone a herd of them (which they'd need to survive anyway).

I think whatever animal was capable of carrying a rider then it is only natural for survivors to "breed" this animal to do the job more ably.

Through breeding this would distinguish the animal from more wild breeds and it would also start to seriously increase population. If a small group of wild horses were discovered then man would assist in helping them to breed. In time this would become big business.

On another note. I like the idea of a domestic animal used for riding that resembles something like a deathclaw. It would be like the tawn tawns iin from The Empire Strikes Back

If there were nothing green in the wastes nothing would have survived. I'm pretty sure brahmin don't eat dirt.


Yes at a reasonable pace. I don't think you people understand that at a reasonable working pace horses do not move as quickly as you're imagining.


Do you people not read anything I write? Or do you just not understand sarcasm? Please go find where I ever said that speed has no impact in war. Your first point is fine but has nothing to do with anything I'm arguing. Your second point is nonsense that demonstrates both a vast ignorance of reality and what we're told is actually constraining the NCR's expansion in the Fallout universe. Hint it ain't being able to show up in a place a few weeks earlier or occasionally being able to more quickly reinforce positions.

Having horses simply doesn't handwave away the commitment of time, money, and troops that's going to be required to secure territory and I would appreciate it if you or Styles would actually address this at some point instead of just pretending that a few mounted units spread over thousands of miles of territory being able to make an extra twenty miles (being generous) somehow relieves the NCR of any of those duties.


Yes it is. It's why the NCR probably wouldn't waste its few mounted units on frontier garrison duty but would have them fighting opponents like the Legion or Khans who might just make use of horses themselves. But nope a few NCR mounted units will probably allow them to slaughter all their enemies, drive to the Mississippi in a decade and settle the land in between.


The biology of animals in Fallout has always been based on sound and realistic principles alright.

Why I call BS on your argument is because your saying cloning and realism are not the issue and that you have no problem

with horses yet any given suggestion as to how thay might be written into the FO world is farfetched and unrealistic.

In short your saying you have no problem with horses yet horses can't exist.

If Im incorrect I apologize and you should have no problem explaining how you would write horses into the FO world I

would love to read your solution.

1 I don't really see your point wouldn't there being more wasteland between cities be a good thing for player travel?

2 Yeah I'd agree but there was the operation anchorage tank mod that the PC could drive and i'm sure Bully (cansis canim edit) was made with the gamebyro engine and that had vehicles in it.

3 Yeah I agree they should be a background element.